** KAMALA HARRIS FOR PRESIDENT -PART DEUX **

Lerxst1992

EdsonNascimento said:

mrussel1 said:

EdsonNascimento said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

EdsonNascimento said:

The Juggler said:

pjl44 said:

EdsonNascimento said:

Gern Blansten said:

53/47 Harris...I can live with that

Sorry to tell you but National polls always lean Dem for whatever reason (probably b/c they're the ones that care more to participate). I think (didn't re-look it up), but Biden was ahead 8 points in polls and won by 4.  In addition. Dems need to win by more than 3 and probably be ahead by like 7 in polls to win b/c they have "wasted" votes in big cities (unless there's some unusual distribution). Winning NYC, Chitown and LA by 5 million each doesn't change the outcomes of those states, but makes the Nat'l overall skew.

So, you really shouldn't be happy with 2.3. Trump wins easily if that's the actual polling at this time.

That's not a poll. The 53% is a probability.

Lol...right.

Next he will tell you Silver was wrong in 2016...even though he was much closer than most. 

Hey, I love Nate Silver.  If I was trusting any of these projections, he's the one I'd trust.  538 no longer belongs to him. HE sold but, but brilliantly kept access to the models. He's critiqued the 538 models that have strayed b/c they don't have his updates.  

So, Nate Silver does have his own projection that's not longer called 538.  That's right - a corporation paid him 10s of millions of dollars for a projection that was only good the moment he gave it to them. From there, you need the right person to adjust it.  

And I'm sure he'll say it's close to 50/50 also.  But, in the end, none of that is relevant.  I'm just trying to guid you to the most important number in the quote - the 2.3 point polling advantage. That's most likely not enough for Harris to win as the real election will skew against that number and Dems always need more votes to win b/c of the cities producing votes that don't effect the electoral college.

So, keep arguing. I'm not saying who's gonna win.  I'm just trying to point out that those probabilities (especially a basically 50/50 for an incumbent should not let you sleep well at night). But, you keep doing you.

Agreed. 2.3 is well within the margin of error and the popular vote totals will be unevenly distributed. I think POOTWH will win for this and other factors I haven’t quite clearly digested and articulated. It’s not going to be one factor, but a combination. ‘Murica is in for some dark days, very dark days.

I have to ask - What dark days were there during 2017-2020.  Obviously COVID, but I don't think even you guys think he's responsible for that.  But, seriously - what happened that makes you think another 4 years is dark?  I really don't get it.  Was it the peace in the Middle East he was formenting? Was it the booming economy (pre-covid)?   Did he end gay marriage?   I really don't get it. Please enlighten me. Maybe I missed something that I should be worried about.  What exactly is going to happen?

And separately - why is Harris talking about fixing the economy and the Wars that happened while she was Vice President?  Shouldn't they have already fixed all that?  Dems have had the Executive offices for 12 of the last 16 years, including the last 3.5.  How is everything Trump's fault?  

Please, policy only. 

I didn't make the statement about "dark days", but I think:

1. The argument for states rights on abortion is an absolute sham.  It doesn't pass the thinnest of intellectual reasoning.  If you want me to expound on that, happy to.  
2.  I would never vote for a president who not support Ukraine's war with Russia.  First off, it's global strategy lunacy not to arm the enemy of your enemy.  The Soviets did it in Vietnam and it worked.  We did it in Afghanistan and it worked.  It works.  And China wants no part of a weak Russia.  
3. Trump didn't end gay marriage but he put in justices that killed Roe.  So what will the next set of justices do?  We don't know.  That's enough for me not to vote for him.  

Appreciate the well thought out response. That's honestly better than most on both sides. I'm still trying to figure out what's all dark about that.

1. You can agree/disagree with abortion being a State issue as you have. But, he (and the Supreme Court) didn't end abortion
2. There were literally no wars when Trump left office.  So, maybe old war ways (GOP is probably more responsible historically, though kind of funny it's the Dems that are the war hawks now) aren't the best either. Maybe, there's another way - friends close, enemies closer...  Whatever Trump was doing worked.  Abraham Accords. Look 'em up.  Ending funding to Iran.  Yes, talking to Putin, China and N. Korea. I don't know. I think Ukraine would rather our President talk to Putin than getting bombed on a daily basis.
3.  Basically the same as issue 1 - you're worried about the Supreme Court make up. Fair.  However, Judges aren't supposed to make law as the liberals on the court try to do. They are just there to interpret it. Nothing stops laws being made that judges can't interpret the way you don't want them to. Make them. Your problem is with the Legislature not the Supreme Court.  They don't make law. They just interpret them.  There's no Federal Law for or against abortion and there's no Constitutional right to one. The Supreme Court properly adjudicated this case according to the law of the land and the Constitution (for the record - I'm pro-choice. I do think there should be limits in timing, but other than that, while morally I'm torn, none of my business. That being said, legally, this was the correct decision).

But none of this portends end of days (I know you weren't the commenter). Funny folks think they do. As opposed to funding Iran to run a proxy war on the only Democracy in the Middle East.  

1. Trump promised and delivered justices to end Roe, which is essentially promising to end women’s right to privacy.

2. Forgetting the Afghan war? The last two wars with American boots on the ground were started by GOP presidents. Trump promised to end the afghan war, but when it became too complicated to deliver, he reneged on his promise. Ignoring Putins aggressions will only lead to more problems. Just ask his neighbors.

3. there is absolutely a constitutional right - how is forcing a rape victim, or a woman carrying a potentially deadly unviable pregnancy, how are these women receiving equal protection under the law?

Go Beavers

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just because get credit for one thing doesn’t mean you get credit for all the things. That was a massive success. Doesn’t mean everything else went well. 

He did many things well. Plenty of Democratic politicians (Newsom) in particular thanked Trump for bypassing red tape and getting their states what they needed quickly. You all hate Trump, you spend many hours of your lives each day justifying the hate to everyone here, I get it. There were many mistakes made by Trump and then Biden. Following Faucis science was now a fraud. No one knew what to do, even the so called experts.

Well, now that we have the 20/20 hindsight, what should we have done better to prevent deaths and mitigate spreading the disease? 

I don’t think much. Covid is still around. A lot of people got sick in Ireland when Ed did earlier this year. Lockdowns hurt worse, people lost businesses, kids lost a year of education. All because of the 6 foot rule that Fauci made up. People thought masks really worked. 

Only the KN95s did anything. People still wearing masks now 🤦‍♂️.

Majority of people that died had underlying factors. Friends of mine that died were overweight, diabetic etc. Maybe a more focused approach on them in hindsight. Forcing vaccines and mask mandates, lockdowns were wrong. 

I don’t blame Trump or Biden on anything they mishandled. What does that solve? It’s something that is a once in a lifetime (hopefully) and I wouldn’t wish that on any President to have to deal with. 

Did someone hack your account?

Tim Simmons

This could be interesting 

https://x.com/tbonier/status/1827100342179524692?s=46&t=BwQTy3yXW5taY_dbOY9RPQ

pjl44

njhaley1 said:

mrussel1 said:

pjl44 said:

mrussel1 said:

pjl44 said:

mrussel1 said:

pjl44 said:

mrussel1 said:

EdsonNascimento said:

mrussel1 said:

EdsonNascimento said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

EdsonNascimento said:

The Juggler said:

pjl44 said:

EdsonNascimento said:

Gern Blansten said:

53/47 Harris...I can live with that

Sorry to tell you but National polls always lean Dem for whatever reason (probably b/c they're the ones that care more to participate). I think (didn't re-look it up), but Biden was ahead 8 points in polls and won by 4.  In addition. Dems need to win by more than 3 and probably be ahead by like 7 in polls to win b/c they have "wasted" votes in big cities (unless there's some unusual distribution). Winning NYC, Chitown and LA by 5 million each doesn't change the outcomes of those states, but makes the Nat'l overall skew.

So, you really shouldn't be happy with 2.3. Trump wins easily if that's the actual polling at this time.

That's not a poll. The 53% is a probability.

Lol...right.

Next he will tell you Silver was wrong in 2016...even though he was much closer than most. 

Hey, I love Nate Silver.  If I was trusting any of these projections, he's the one I'd trust.  538 no longer belongs to him. HE sold but, but brilliantly kept access to the models. He's critiqued the 538 models that have strayed b/c they don't have his updates.  

So, Nate Silver does have his own projection that's not longer called 538.  That's right - a corporation paid him 10s of millions of dollars for a projection that was only good the moment he gave it to them. From there, you need the right person to adjust it.  

And I'm sure he'll say it's close to 50/50 also.  But, in the end, none of that is relevant.  I'm just trying to guid you to the most important number in the quote - the 2.3 point polling advantage. That's most likely not enough for Harris to win as the real election will skew against that number and Dems always need more votes to win b/c of the cities producing votes that don't effect the electoral college.

So, keep arguing. I'm not saying who's gonna win.  I'm just trying to point out that those probabilities (especially a basically 50/50 for an incumbent should not let you sleep well at night). But, you keep doing you.

Agreed. 2.3 is well within the margin of error and the popular vote totals will be unevenly distributed. I think POOTWH will win for this and other factors I haven’t quite clearly digested and articulated. It’s not going to be one factor, but a combination. ‘Murica is in for some dark days, very dark days.

I have to ask - What dark days were there during 2017-2020.  Obviously COVID, but I don't think even you guys think he's responsible for that.  But, seriously - what happened that makes you think another 4 years is dark?  I really don't get it.  Was it the peace in the Middle East he was formenting? Was it the booming economy (pre-covid)?   Did he end gay marriage?   I really don't get it. Please enlighten me. Maybe I missed something that I should be worried about.  What exactly is going to happen?

And separately - why is Harris talking about fixing the economy and the Wars that happened while she was Vice President?  Shouldn't they have already fixed all that?  Dems have had the Executive offices for 12 of the last 16 years, including the last 3.5.  How is everything Trump's fault?  

Please, policy only. 

I didn't make the statement about "dark days", but I think:

1. The argument for states rights on abortion is an absolute sham.  It doesn't pass the thinnest of intellectual reasoning.  If you want me to expound on that, happy to.  
2.  I would never vote for a president who not support Ukraine's war with Russia.  First off, it's global strategy lunacy not to arm the enemy of your enemy.  The Soviets did it in Vietnam and it worked.  We did it in Afghanistan and it worked.  It works.  And China wants no part of a weak Russia.  
3. Trump didn't end gay marriage but he put in justices that killed Roe.  So what will the next set of justices do?  We don't know.  That's enough for me not to vote for him.  

Appreciate the well thought out response. That's honestly better than most on both sides. I'm still trying to figure out what's all dark about that.

1. You can agree/disagree with abortion being a State issue as you have. But, he (and the Supreme Court) didn't end abortion
2. There were literally no wars when Trump left office.  So, maybe old war ways (GOP is probably more responsible historically, though kind of funny it's the Dems that are the war hawks now) aren't the best either. Maybe, there's another way - friends close, enemies closer...  Whatever Trump was doing worked.  Abraham Accords. Look 'em up.  Ending funding to Iran.  Yes, talking to Putin, China and N. Korea. I don't know. I think Ukraine would rather our President talk to Putin than getting bombed on a daily basis.
3.  Basically the same as issue 1 - you're worried about the Supreme Court make up. Fair.  However, Judges aren't supposed to make law as the liberals on the court try to do. They are just there to interpret it. Nothing stops laws being made that judges can't interpret the way you don't want them to. Make them. Your problem is with the Legislature not the Supreme Court.  They don't make law. They just interpret them.  There's no Federal Law for or against abortion and there's no Constitutional right to one. The Supreme Court properly adjudicated this case according to the law of the land and the Constitution (for the record - I'm pro-choice. I do think there should be limits in timing, but other than that, while morally I'm torn, none of my business. That being said, legally, this was the correct decision).

But none of this portends end of days (I know you weren't the commenter). Funny folks think they do. As opposed to funding Iran to run a proxy war on the only Democracy in the Middle East.  

1. Russia didn't invade Ukraine because they were ill prepared to do so in the years leading up to 2020 and you sure aren't going to put in an army in the field during a pandemic.  Trump's foreign policy positions are frankly ridiculous.  

2. Abraham Accords were all well and good, but they tackled the easy issues.  He NEVER touched Palestine and made zero progress on that front. 

3. While I agree that using the 14th to establish Roe was tortured logic, the fact is it was stare decisis.  And all three new justices agreed it was stare decisis.  So what's next?  Brown?  Maybe.  Obergefell is certainly not old enough to be considered as such.  You say it was legally correct, maybe in 1972 but not in 2022 when every justice claims to honor precedent, not just being textualist.  

"All well and good" is begrudging acceptance that the guy had a couple rare wins. Normalizing relations between Israel and two Arab countries was a big deal. Sidelining Iran is the move. And no progress on Palestine is something you can hang on every one of the Earth's brightest minds in the last several decades.

Last time I checked, the war in the ME is between Palestine and Israel.  Did you really have Israel-Bahrain and Israel-UAE on your bingo card as the next hot spot?  I didn't.  But I could have guessed Palestine.  

Firm grasp of the region. I will let this lie and exit stage left.

Don't claim you've got peace in the middle east and don't even address Palestine.  Like I said, those two countries are all well and good.  Congrats.  But Trump didn't attack the one that, to your point, vexes everyone.  Sorry, it's not even close to moving my vote.  And don't condescend me either.  I've got a firm grasp, but I don't fall for shallow victories.  

Look I'm sorry but if you're intimating that the Abraham Accords were about staving off a hot war between Bahrain and Israel, some light condescension is justified 

I'm still struggling with your 'coin flip' comment.  

A few pages back, @pjl44 brought up the very important point that, despite what you or I might think about the whole situation, Trump and Harris are still polling neck and neck for all intents and purposes.  Given what you and I firmly believe in our hearts about the guy, why is this race so damn close?  

There are moderate/independents who still need reaching, and for some like @pjl44 that requires a real thorough discussion of policy.  Can't fault them for that and I agree, despite being sold on Harris by a long shot. 

Thanks, that's a really good summary. 

Gern Blansten

David Plouffe is working for the Harris campaign. He was Obama's guy. He was really big on new registration. 

mickeyrat

fucking brandons inflation....

https://www.threads.net/@dtrav63/post/C_DddonOMeS/?xmt=AQGz77u-h2ny_8SScyHB3D_cY6MvBwD9jYBz7KaPKBqT3Q

Lerxst1992

Gern Blansten said:

David Plouffe is working for the Harris campaign. He was Obama's guy. He was really big on new registration. 

One reason I have hope Harris can outperform the state polls. Plouffe maybe the best campaign mind of modern times. Bidens win 2020 gets an * due to the unusual and overwhelming nature of mail in ballots, and the 2016 Hilary team was a dumpster fire.

HughFreakingDillon

EdsonNascimento said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Merkin Baller said:

huh.... 

White House lawyers who advised Reagan, Bush endorse Harris over Trump in 2024 showdown | Fox News

White House lawyers who advised Reagan, Bush endorse Harris over Trump in 2024 showdown

Trump 'remains unfit, dangerous and detached from reality,' say the former GOP White House lawyers

FIRST ON FOX: A dozen Republican White House lawyers who served in the administrations of then-Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush are endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in her race against GOP nominee former President Donald Trump.

"We endorse Kamala Harris and support her election as President because we believe that returning former President Trump to office would threaten American democracy and undermine the rule of law in our country," the lawyers wrote in a letter that the signatories shared first with Fox News Digital....

The letter notes, "Donald Trump’s own Vice President and multiple members of his Administration and White House Staff at the most senior levels – as well as former Republican nominees for President and Vice President – have already declined to endorse his reelection."

Those signing the letter pointed to what they called "the profound risks presented by his [Trump's] potential return to public office. Indeed, Trump’s own Attorney General and National Security Adviser have said unequivocally that Donald Trump is unfit for office, dangerous, and detached from reality."...

continues 

Lawyers that brought us The New World Order, the Iraq War and are RINOs not endorsing POOTWH? No surprise there and they’ll wear it as a badge of authenticity and it proves POOTWH is fighting for the “little guy.”

This is what's funny.  You'd think the hippies and grunge anti-establishment folks would be all for Trump.  But, alas, they've been exposed for what they are. Which, the only true mod, Pete agrees with.

All the old guard on both sides hate Trump.  Why??????

Hippies and anti-establishment folks would be all for Trump? you can't be serious. that draining the swamp and tearing down the system bullshit was all a ruse. he was for tearing down restrictions on HIMSELF and other rich people, not the common man. This is basic shit. 

mickeyrat

mickeyrat

I wonder how they track interent viewers also?

HughFreakingDillon

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just because get credit for one thing doesn’t mean you get credit for all the things. That was a massive success. Doesn’t mean everything else went well. 

He did many things well. Plenty of Democratic politicians (Newsom) in particular thanked Trump for bypassing red tape and getting their states what they needed quickly. You all hate Trump, you spend many hours of your lives each day justifying the hate to everyone here, I get it. There were many mistakes made by Trump and then Biden. Following Faucis science was now a fraud. No one knew what to do, even the so called experts.

Well, now that we have the 20/20 hindsight, what should we have done better to prevent deaths and mitigate spreading the disease? 

I don’t think much. Covid is still around. A lot of people got sick in Ireland when Ed did earlier this year. Lockdowns hurt worse, people lost businesses, kids lost a year of education. All because of the 6 foot rule that Fauci made up. People thought masks really worked. 

Only the KN95s did anything. People still wearing masks now 🤦‍♂️.

Majority of people that died had underlying factors. Friends of mine that died were overweight, diabetic etc. Maybe a more focused approach on them in hindsight. Forcing vaccines and mask mandates, lockdowns were wrong. 

I don’t blame Trump or Biden on anything they mishandled. What does that solve? It’s something that is a once in a lifetime (hopefully) and I wouldn’t wish that on any President to have to deal with. 

if masks don't work why does your dentist or surgeon wear one? do you tell them to take it off before they work on you since they are worthless?

many, many people without underlying factors died. that's well documented. another right wing talking point with no basis in fact. just anecdotes. 

trump absolutely should get credit for warp speed. Unfortunately, he later decided to bow to his low IQ supporters because they rejected it, and he went into full idiot mode with regards to minimizing transmission. 

covid is still around, but, if you have been paying any attention the last 4 years, it mutates to a point where it will ALWAYS be around (i.e: no longer killing its host). that's what happened with the flu in the early 1900's. that's what happened now, and what they suspected, even from the early days of the pandemic. 

lockdowns did help (the data showed lower transmission and deaths during lockdown phases), but obviously that couldn't be a permanent measure. they had no choice to do that until there was more data and/or a vaccine. 

the 6 foot rule was, to any person with a brain, was obviously a guideline to stop people from congregating in close groups. At the time, they didn't think it was airborne, so the 6 foot rule made sense based on how far water droplets projected into the air and how long they hung there. 

the fact that, 4 years in, you still don't understand any of this, is just absurd. 

teskeinc

HughFreakingDillon said:

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just because get credit for one thing doesn’t mean you get credit for all the things. That was a massive success. Doesn’t mean everything else went well. 

He did many things well. Plenty of Democratic politicians (Newsom) in particular thanked Trump for bypassing red tape and getting their states what they needed quickly. You all hate Trump, you spend many hours of your lives each day justifying the hate to everyone here, I get it. There were many mistakes made by Trump and then Biden. Following Faucis science was now a fraud. No one knew what to do, even the so called experts.

Well, now that we have the 20/20 hindsight, what should we have done better to prevent deaths and mitigate spreading the disease? 

I don’t think much. Covid is still around. A lot of people got sick in Ireland when Ed did earlier this year. Lockdowns hurt worse, people lost businesses, kids lost a year of education. All because of the 6 foot rule that Fauci made up. People thought masks really worked. 

Only the KN95s did anything. People still wearing masks now 🤦‍♂️.

Majority of people that died had underlying factors. Friends of mine that died were overweight, diabetic etc. Maybe a more focused approach on them in hindsight. Forcing vaccines and mask mandates, lockdowns were wrong. 

I don’t blame Trump or Biden on anything they mishandled. What does that solve? It’s something that is a once in a lifetime (hopefully) and I wouldn’t wish that on any President to have to deal with. 

if masks don't work why does your dentist or surgeon wear one? do you tell them to take it off before they work on you since they are worthless?

many, many people without underlying factors died. that's well documented. another right wing talking point with no basis in fact. just anecdotes. 

trump absolutely should get credit for warp speed. Unfortunately, he later decided to bow to his low IQ supporters because they rejected it, and he went into full idiot mode with regards to minimizing transmission. 

covid is still around, but, if you have been paying any attention the last 4 years, it mutates to a point where it will ALWAYS be around (i.e: no longer killing its host). that's what happened with the flu in the early 1900's. that's what happened now, and what they suspected, even from the early days of the pandemic. 

lockdowns did help (the data showed lower transmission and deaths during lockdown phases), but obviously that couldn't be a permanent measure. they had no choice to do that until there was more data and/or a vaccine. 

the 6 foot rule was, to any person with a brain, was obviously a guideline to stop people from congregating in close groups. At the time, they didn't think it was airborne, so the 6 foot rule made sense based on how far water droplets projected into the air and how long they hung there. 

the fact that, 4 years in, you still don't understand any of this, is just absurd. 

I’m sure you’re on your 8th vaccine by now. Thank you for your service. 

njhaley1

HughFreakingDillon said:

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just because get credit for one thing doesn’t mean you get credit for all the things. That was a massive success. Doesn’t mean everything else went well. 

He did many things well. Plenty of Democratic politicians (Newsom) in particular thanked Trump for bypassing red tape and getting their states what they needed quickly. You all hate Trump, you spend many hours of your lives each day justifying the hate to everyone here, I get it. There were many mistakes made by Trump and then Biden. Following Faucis science was now a fraud. No one knew what to do, even the so called experts.

Well, now that we have the 20/20 hindsight, what should we have done better to prevent deaths and mitigate spreading the disease? 

I don’t think much. Covid is still around. A lot of people got sick in Ireland when Ed did earlier this year. Lockdowns hurt worse, people lost businesses, kids lost a year of education. All because of the 6 foot rule that Fauci made up. People thought masks really worked. 

Only the KN95s did anything. People still wearing masks now 🤦‍♂️.

Majority of people that died had underlying factors. Friends of mine that died were overweight, diabetic etc. Maybe a more focused approach on them in hindsight. Forcing vaccines and mask mandates, lockdowns were wrong. 

I don’t blame Trump or Biden on anything they mishandled. What does that solve? It’s something that is a once in a lifetime (hopefully) and I wouldn’t wish that on any President to have to deal with. 

if masks don't work why does your dentist or surgeon wear one? do you tell them to take it off before they work on you since they are worthless?

many, many people without underlying factors died. that's well documented. another right wing talking point with no basis in fact. just anecdotes. 

trump absolutely should get credit for warp speed. Unfortunately, he later decided to bow to his low IQ supporters because they rejected it, and he went into full idiot mode with regards to minimizing transmission. 

covid is still around, but, if you have been paying any attention the last 4 years, it mutates to a point where it will ALWAYS be around (i.e: no longer killing its host). that's what happened with the flu in the early 1900's. that's what happened now, and what they suspected, even from the early days of the pandemic. 

lockdowns did help (the data showed lower transmission and deaths during lockdown phases), but obviously that couldn't be a permanent measure. they had no choice to do that until there was more data and/or a vaccine. 

the 6 foot rule was, to any person with a brain, was obviously a guideline to stop people from congregating in close groups. At the time, they didn't think it was airborne, so the 6 foot rule made sense based on how far water droplets projected into the air and how long they hung there. 

the fact that, 4 years in, you still don't understand any of this, is just absurd. 

Not worth your time, Hugh. So many factually incorrect statements, and in the end it's another effort to drag people into a pointless side discussion. It very succinctly speaks to how TFG has setback healthcare in this country DECADES. And to what end? To the benefit of our adversaries, that's what. 

Darwin will sort this all out. 

Gern Blansten

Please don't feed the trolls. Thank you. 

josevolution

HughFreakingDillon said:

EdsonNascimento said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Merkin Baller said:

huh.... 

White House lawyers who advised Reagan, Bush endorse Harris over Trump in 2024 showdown | Fox News

White House lawyers who advised Reagan, Bush endorse Harris over Trump in 2024 showdown

Trump 'remains unfit, dangerous and detached from reality,' say the former GOP White House lawyers

FIRST ON FOX: A dozen Republican White House lawyers who served in the administrations of then-Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush are endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in her race against GOP nominee former President Donald Trump.

"We endorse Kamala Harris and support her election as President because we believe that returning former President Trump to office would threaten American democracy and undermine the rule of law in our country," the lawyers wrote in a letter that the signatories shared first with Fox News Digital....

The letter notes, "Donald Trump’s own Vice President and multiple members of his Administration and White House Staff at the most senior levels – as well as former Republican nominees for President and Vice President – have already declined to endorse his reelection."

Those signing the letter pointed to what they called "the profound risks presented by his [Trump's] potential return to public office. Indeed, Trump’s own Attorney General and National Security Adviser have said unequivocally that Donald Trump is unfit for office, dangerous, and detached from reality."...

continues 

Lawyers that brought us The New World Order, the Iraq War and are RINOs not endorsing POOTWH? No surprise there and they’ll wear it as a badge of authenticity and it proves POOTWH is fighting for the “little guy.”

This is what's funny.  You'd think the hippies and grunge anti-establishment folks would be all for Trump.  But, alas, they've been exposed for what they are. Which, the only true mod, Pete agrees with.

All the old guard on both sides hate Trump.  Why??????

Hippies and anti-establishment folks would be all for Trump? you can't be serious. that draining the swamp and tearing down the system bullshit was all a ruse. he was for tearing down restrictions on HIMSELF and other rich people, not the common man. This is basic shit. 

Yeah he’s delusional if he thinks the hippie type would align themselves with some vile piece of 💩 like trumpollini 😂😂 let me just keep on laughing! 

teskeinc

Huge bounce for Trump after the RFK Jr endorsement. Some are saying 5%. Is it too late to replace Kamala if polls show she can’t win?

Tim Simmons

Nate Silver says it’s about half a point. 

Halifax2TheMax

Tim Simmons said:

Nate Silver says it’s about half a point. 

Many some are saying though, so it has to be true. Who are Dems going to replace Kamala with when she trails in the polls?

mrussel1

teskeinc said:

Huge bounce for Trump after the RFK Jr endorsement. Some are saying 5%. Is it too late to replace Kamala if polls show she can’t win?

Wow.  Where's the link to the poll that was in the field yesterday afternoon, hit a statistically significant number of respondents, and produced the results to you by 5:29, 24 hours later.  

teskeinc

Genius move by Republicans though. The DNC convention was out of the news cycle before any attendees boarded a plane Friday.

Do those 6% of voters just not vote? Do they go with who their candidate endorsed? Hoping RFK plays a role in a Trump cabinet? Do Democrats think they will come back to vote Kamala after she blew him off and was shit on by the party? 

Some of those swing states were decided by razor thin margins in 2020. If Trump wins close, this potentially was the deciding factor. 

Massive mistake by Dems to not reach out to RFK Jr.